Parking Lot Road Policy

[sewell...@gmail.com]

I am new to Google Map Maker, but I am really enjoying myself. One thing that confuses me, however, is the way Google Maps treat roads within parking lots. While it may make sense to show major distributor roads within parking lots, many users map every single parking aisle. This does not make sense - either to me or to the average user. A parking aisle is not a road. It doesn't go anywhere, and it doesn't provide connections from place to place, so there is no need for a map to show it. Furthermore, since Google Maps also has Satellite imagery built-in, any user who needs to know the exact location of a parking aisle can easily see it. But a map is supposed to be a simplification - it is not supposed to show every feature on the landscape, but rather a selection of what is important.

For example, here is a shopping center near where I live, where new roads were recently added:

Woodbine, the north/south street, should be a terminal road. It starts at an actual street and terminates at a parking lot, so it is terminal. But all of the parking bays are not roads. They will not help anyone find their way anywhere, because they don't go anywhere. They are actually the content of an urban block, not the connection between blocks. And, as I said before, they unnecessarily clutter the map. Parking would be better represented by a boundary.

Example #2 is an area I am working on. Recently a convention center near me built a new parking lot, replacing the blocks and streets that were there before.

I have been trying to remove Western Ave, Davis St, and Jones Ave, because these roads are gone. They no longer have a name, and they no longer serve as roads. The previous roadbed has been removed, and it has been replaced by a parking lot. It is merely happenstance that parking aisles are located in the same location, because they are not the same, and they do not even connect in the same way - Jones is now divided by a sidewalk. But Google moderators prefer to smugly deny my edits without referring to any specific rules on how things should be done.

So, I propose that parking lots should be represented by polygons, except for terminal roads that lead from an actual street into the parking lot without giving direct access to spaces. If there is contradictory policy somewhere, please let me know. Let us not forget that any user can see the world in full detail by merely clicking on the satellite button. Our map is a simplification and should not be cluttered with insignificant roads.

[Patrick S]

I am confused by the tendency to display parking lot aisles as roads. These are not roads, because they don't lead anywhere from anywhere. They are typically internal to an urban block, so it doesn't make sense to display them as roads. They should be displayed as boundaries. Here's a typical example from near where I live in Atlanta:

It doesn't make sense to show these aisles as roads, and it only clutters the map. Wrenwood, which runs from an actual city street and terminates in a parking lot should be a terminal road, but the remainder of the parking lot aisles should be shown as a polygon.

Here's an example I've been working on:

I've been trying to remove Western, Davis, and Jones, because these city streets have been replaced by a parking lot. They were formerly urban blocks, but they have been removed and they no longer have names. It is merely coincidental that aisles run in the same location (although Jones is now split by a sidewalk). But moderators ask me not to remove these streets.

Is there a policy? I propose that streets leading into a parking lot without any actual parking access should be terminal streets, but all other parking lot streets should be removed and shown as boundaries.

[zxrayz]

The internal parking lot road can be shown, but they should be set to priority Terminal and segment usage Enclosed Traffic / Parking Lot 

The parking lot roads do not look very nice on the satellite view with the new rending method, but on the map view when combined with a parking lot boundary is looks good.

[rjhintz]

I noticed that in at least one case the Google Streetview car went through a parking lot on the internal parking lot "road."  If you zoom out, you can see the actual road, Woodman, to the east.

--

Rich

[deltafox]

In that case at least it is clear that Western, Davis, and Jones should be deleted since they no longer exist as city streets, and every reviewer should understand it once you explain it to him - even Google reviewers ;-)

In the absence of any general policy, some mappers seem to enjoy adding as much details as they can, internal parkings aisles (why not every individual car place ?) or even lanes in toll booth areas - I think there is better to do if they really want to spend their time... More serious, it will make other mappers spend even more time to clean the area when the parking is deleted, or each time there is a new imagery in the area, since there is no quicker way than selecting and moving each intersection one by one ! At least as long as GMM do not provide any way of moving/deleting a whole area

Best is the enemy of Good ;-)

[rjhintz]

Hi deltafox,

  One use case for lanes in a toll booth area would be that only some lanes might have attributes for automated toll payment only.

--
Rich

[leromag]

deltafox a écrit :

> In that case at least it is clear that Western, Davis, and Jones should be
> deleted since they no longer exist as city streets, and every reviewer
> should understand it once you explain it to him - even Google reviewers ;-)
>
> In the absence of any general policy, some mappers seem to enjoy adding as

> much details as they can, internal parkings aisles<http://www.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=A7&daddr=A7&hl=fr&geocode=FUbd3AEdRIR4_w%3BFdsu3QEdHvt4_w&mra=dme&mrsp=1&sz=15&sll=31.263255,-8.871589&sspn=0.034703,0.066047&ie=UTF8&ll=33.375516,-7.579338&spn=0.004238,0.008256&z=18>(why not every individual car place ?) or evenlanes in toll booth areas<http://www.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=A7&daddr=A7&hl=fr&geocode=FUbd3AEdRIR4_w%3BFdsu3QEdHvt4_w&mra=dme&mrsp=1&sz=15&sll=31.263255,-8.871589&sspn=0.034703,0.066047&ie=UTF8&ll=34.30776,-6.508332&spn=0.004192,0.008256&z=18>- I think there is better to do if they really want to spend their time...

[Brian N]

Could Google provide a standard policy on matters like this?  Or at least could we polls/votes by the map making community as what they would like see done. 

It would be really pointless to have a cycle of:
- Person A thinks the details are important and adds them
- Person B thinks the details are unnecessary and removes them to clean up the map
- Person A gets annoyed that Person B removed them, and adds them again...

and so on...


Basically I am ALL FOR standards as long as they are searchable and easy to find the info you are looking for.  i.e I should be able to search "Parking Lot' and see an example of how to do it and how not to do.

[Aaron Private Email]

Well if you guys take a look in the google map maker help section,
under roads you find segments. In segments has enclosed traffic /
parking lot. These roads are made specifically for those said roads in
between parking spots. Take a look at the help page.

http://www.google.com/support/mapmaker/bin/static.py?page=guide.cs&guide=1094314&topic=1094373&answer=1098048

[sewell...@gmail.com]

The fact that Google includes a label for "parking lot roads" doesn't mean that every parking lot needs to be represented with segments showing every aisle. We could also represent every address on every street with a marker, but that doesn't mean we should. My argument is that if a piece of pavement exists only to let people into parking spaces, then it isn't actually a road. Roads have to go somewhere, to lead between two places. A parking aisle doesn't lead anywhere - it's completely internal to the place we're talking about - the parking lot - which is best represented by a boundary.

Also, I'd like to note that the only time a parking lot is represented this way is in suburban shopping centers. No one ever tries to represent an urban parking lot with segments along the aisles, because we know that the parking lot is merely a temporary use and isn't inherent to the structure of the city. In dense urban areas, it is obvious what is a street and what is merely an access aisle. Showing parking aisles on urban parking lots would disrupt the block structure of the city, making cognition of the urban structure more difficult. And I think we know this implicitly.

For example, see http://goo.gl/maps/f8IV . Does anyone think these lots should be represented by segments along aisles? Would anyone argue that this improve the cognition of the area - to break up the representation of the grid structure and replace it with segments that are not actually roads?

But in suburban areas, the urban structure is less clear, and representing a parking lot with segments along aisles competes less with the existing image of the road network. But I argue that it is still an unnecessary addition, adding too much detail to the map and inhibiting cognition. A better representation would be of the buildings themselves and boundaries for parking lots. Major in and out streets, particularly  those not lined with parking spaces, should be represented by parking lot roads.

[Trey Daum]

I am new to map-making and think that the issue of parking lot aisles is a matter og Google decisions about what to render in whatlevel of detail views, and not a matter of what should be added by map-makers. Map makers should add as much detail as possible, (yes even, at some point if google provides it as an option, individual car spots) and Google should decide at what zoom levels to render the parking lines. Of course parking lines will clutter a map in neighborhood-wide zoom levels, but for road-wide or business-wide levels, the details can be helpful and determining where things are.

Thoughts?

[Saikrishna]

I agree with you. Google doesn't show local roads when you are at a state or country level, so this should be easy to implement. To add to this, Google should add a mass-edit or mass-move function so that it is easier for us to move them when new imagery comes in.

[zxrayz]

I too like detail, but yes at the proper level.  

In a country where finding a parking lot can be a major headache even at major businesses and getting in or out of parking lots due to one-way roads or block entrances I personally find the 'enclosed traffic / parking lot' roads to be helpful. 

[mIX]

I agree with you, because terminal road + Enclosed Traffic Area does make the Aisle roads very small and you only see them when you zoom in.  The thoroughfares show up before the aisles do.

I would argue that it gives better directions if you can route the person directly to the business in the complex rather than dumping them on the street outside the parking lot with no additional detail on how to get to the business. Navigating across a parking lot you may not stick to the thoroughfares at all times, It may be faster to cut through an aisle to get to another thoroughfare.